[07:10] <hakermania> Hey, can anyone drop me a link on how to get a program that's in the archives to update through the update manager? t35 free hosting closed permanently without any warning and we have to move the site. We need to update the program as well.
[07:28] <hakermania> Well, I found it :D. The reason I have doesn't seem to be so good... But the application has been improved very much and I have fixed some major bugs. Do you think I could gain an update?
[07:56] <tumbleweed> hakermania: we're almost at the end of feature freeze, with the release coming out next week. I don't think getting an update in before then is possible. If you have specific bug fixes rather than new features, we can do a https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
[08:02] <hakermania> tumbleweed, yeah, I am not in a big hurry, I have generally fixed many issues, improved the code *very* much, cleaned it up etc. There's no any very very major bug except the fact the the site has changed due to t35 service that closed...
[08:02] <hakermania> Is this imprortant enough for an update?
[08:03] <tumbleweed> no, I don't think so
[08:04] <hakermania> tumbleweed, well, then when do new versions (that generally include minor bug fixes and new features) should go in?
[08:04] <tumbleweed> hakermania: new versions go into the new development release
[08:05] <hakermania> tumbleweed, Oh, Ok, I got it. Through REVU again? Same process?
[08:06] <tumbleweed> http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/introduction-to-ubuntu-development.html explains some of this
[08:07] <tumbleweed> REVU, or a link to the new tarball, and a debdiff of your packaging
[08:07] <tumbleweed> or even better, get it into debian
[08:09] <hakermania> All roads lead to Ro..err, to debian :/
[09:06] <Laney> file a bug, link to new tarball, attach new diff.gz/debian.tar.gz
[09:06] <Laney> or do a merge proposal against lp:ubuntu/yourpackage
[09:06] <Laney> *cough* or get your Debian sponsor to upload it and then request a sync
[09:17] <ajmitch> Laney: you're offering? :)
[09:18] <Laney> the first step is for the contributor to be willing
[09:19] <ajmitch> it is preferable for packages to be maintained there
[09:20] <Laney> this point has been reiterated innumerable times
[09:22]  * ajmitch wonders how it can be made easier for people, since the usual complaint is that they don't have a debian install
[09:25] <Laney> if installing a vm is too hard, then there are probably bigger problems
[12:23] <jtaylor> laney: maybe you can comment on bug 840135
[12:24] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: why should backports by disabled by default?
[12:24] <jtaylor> it was before oneiric
[12:24] <tumbleweed> yes, and it was enabled, as discussed at UDS
[12:25] <tumbleweed> they are now safe to have enabled
[12:25] <jtaylor> yes but not everybody knows that
[12:25] <jtaylor> e.g. I don't know how to answer that bug
[12:25] <jtaylor> I just know its intentional
[12:25] <tumbleweed> hrm, maybe we should note it in the release notes
[12:27] <jtaylor> btw someone please ack bug 871265, thx
[12:31] <tumbleweed> Laney, ScottK: commented on the bug. Maybe you want to add a release note?
[12:40] <tumbleweed> jtaylor: sponsored
[14:05] <Laney> what a weird bug
[14:05] <Laney> 'something has changed'
[14:09] <tumbleweed> well, advice we previously gave people isn't valid any more
[14:11] <Laney> so the documentation needs updating
[14:12] <tumbleweed> if people aren't told that it's safe, they'll worry
[14:15] <Laney> what people worry about a problem with 0 evidence that it exists?
[14:16] <Laney> if i were to announce it it would be "yay look how great this is" not "your system is not going to break"
[14:17] <tumbleweed> looks like this person did. But this is a poinltless argument, I'm removing myself from it :)
[14:18] <Laney> he also did not provide any rationale for his report
[14:18] <Laney> and yes, i agree
[14:19]  * Laney carries on trying to replicate the darcs ftbfs
[14:19]  * tumbleweed carries on fixing non-blocking IO in pypy
[15:18] <tumbleweed> Laney: I'm picking off the low hanging fruit from rcbugs. Sorry for the review work :P
[16:24] <and`> anyone do have an idea about why quickly hasn't been pushed to Debian yet?
[16:24] <and`> I see an RFP filed, but no actions since more than an year.
[16:32] <tumbleweed> and`: RFPs tend to be ignored. There's more than enough work to do in Debian
[16:33] <tumbleweed> as its' already packaged in Ubuntu, that could be turned into a RFA
[16:34] <and`> tumbleweed: yeah, I wanted to upload it into Debian starting directly from the Ubuntu package
[16:34] <and`> I think there won't be big deltas
[16:34] <tumbleweed> and`: if you want to maintain it in Debian, go ahead. IT's still an RFP, nobody is doing anything about it
[16:35] <and`> tumbleweed: sure, and if you're eventually willing to help me out, just let me know :)
[16:36]  * tumbleweed hasn't used it myself, I usually only package things I use
[17:37] <debfx> bdrung: I think it would be good to upload a vlc 1.1.12 (fake)sync to oneiric-proposed now since it's probably too late to get it into oneiric-release
[18:35]  * Zhenech opens a can of worms: what's the status of gnome <something> in 11.10?
[18:36] <Zhenech> or rather: what will be released
[18:37] <tumbleweed> whatever is currently published in oneiric. Upgrade and see.
[18:37] <Zhenech> sitting on a debian/xfce box → not so good idea ;)
[18:39] <Zhenech> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/OneiricOcelot/TechnicalOverview says 3.1.9ish
[18:39] <jtaylor> its 3.2 now
[18:41] <Zhenech> thanks
[21:59] <Q-FUNK> would anyone have exprience of removing symbolic links and shuffling old configs around via *.preinst ?